ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2023
Development and evaluation of the Norwegian Fatigue Characteristics and Interference Measure (FCIM) for stroke survivors: cognitive interviews and Rasch analysis.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond interference: occupational participation considerations in the assessment of post-stroke fatigue.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Mediating role of students' self-assessment in the relationships among EFL students' L2 grit, motivation, and willingness to communicate.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- PACOPED QL: Development and evaluation of the quality-of-life scale for children with life-threatening illnesses.Palliative & supportive care · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThere is need for a comprehensive measure of post-stroke fatigue with sound measurement properties. This study aimed to develop the Norwegian Fatigue Characteristics and Interference Measure (FCIM) and assess its content validity, structural validity, and internal consistency.
methodThis study consisted of three steps: (1) an expert panel developed version 1.0 of the Norwegian FCIM, (2) its content validity was assessed in cognitive interviews with stroke patients (N = 15), (3) a convenience sample of stroke patients (N = 169) completed an online questionnaire with the FCIM, Fatigue Severity Scale, and sociodemographic information; validity and reliability were assessed using Rasch analysis.
resultsFCIM version 1.0 included a 10-item characteristics subscale, a 20-item interference subscale, and two pre-stroke fatigue items. The cognitive interviews revealed content validity issues, resulting in two interference items being removed and five items being flagged but retained for Rasch analysis (version 2.0). Rasch analysis led to removal of four items from the characteristics subscale and six more from the interference subscale. The final six-item characteristics subscale and 12-item interference subscale (version 3.0) both showed adequate fit to the Rasch model with indications of unidimensionality and local independence. The interference subscale had a high person separation index. No significant differential item function (DIF) was found in relation to gender, but one item demonstrated DIF in relation to age.
conclusionThe cognitive interviews and Rasch analysis demonstrated that the Norwegian version of the FCIM has high content validity, structural validity, and internal consistency. Future research should assess its construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.